Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
justy775

Why Read Cap

Recommended Posts

I'm sort of new to this whole kritik debate stuff. Why do people run cap because its a very generic argument with a ton of responses to.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There's tons of lit on it- while it might be generic and there are quite a few responses, they actually boil down to only a few arguments (cap good, cap inevitable, etc)

Also, its true

  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Q:

I'm sort of new to this whole kritik debate stuff. Why do people run cap because its a very generic argument with a ton of responses to.

 

A:

because its a very generic argument with a ton of responses to.
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'll suggest 4 to 5 reasons:

 

1) Cap Links to Everything

2) It outweighs the case [potentially...or at least its easy to access root cause of war & -isms]

3) Most affs can't link turn it (PMCs **might** be)

4) Cap. even links to K & performance affs potentially

 

Lots of predictable answers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I won't spend much time reiterating the above but it has an astoundingly large literature base and there are many varieties of the criticism. It's the same reason one would read security, it links to damn near everything and accesses large impacts. The primary difference is you can avoid the question of framework and isolate the debate on more offensive substantive arguments.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

OP, your post suggests that you think that the rarity of an argument is a big factor determining the strength of an argument. I used to think this too, but this is incorrect.

 

I don't have time right now, but maybe someone else could explain more?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think it helps that almost everyone in debate is at least kind of a socialist, whereas many judges think threats are real, util is good, etc.

 

It's also super easy to find really good cap K cards

Edited by Needs More Consult Japan

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
OP, your post suggests that you think that the rarity of an argument is a big factor determining the strength of an argument. I used to think this too, but this is incorrect.

 

I don't have time right now, but maybe someone else could explain more?

 

Some arguments are predictable for a reason - they make sense on the topic and are strategic. For example, this year a lot of the most successful teams ran coin. It was no secret that this was the most popular aff, but for some reason it kept winning. This is because there was a wreck of literature supporting it and it had good links to impacts like heg (another generic yet strategic argument). Also, the more predictable an argument is, the more predictable its answers become

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's a solid position, even somewhat conservative judges will usually vote on it because if argued properly it can be almost like a DA + CP debate.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

there is one particullar thing I like about running cap. It is the reason to vote for the alternative. the card is International Perspective 2007. It says that all of the aff's impacts are inevitable under a system of cap, because conflict between orbiting states and the hegemon will always happen. It works as a good case turn.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I read cap against neolib affs saying they are doing it wrong, and it's a true argument. If the state caused your harms, why use the state to solve them? lolz. Tumino in 1.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I just got done reading cap in (almost) every round of this year's topic and I think there are a couple reasons that people read it.

 

1. The links

You can find links to just about every single thing an affirmative can do. Additionally, there are a few links you can always read in the block to solidify the link, and they can also function as embedded disads if you choose to not go for all the links(see Stephen Murray's post on the perfect storm 1nc for more one links as disads). These would be like state links, single-issue-campaign links, or masking links.

 

2. Its simple

Just about the most simple kritik there is. I'm sure you could make a case for something like security or statism, but the tried and true anecdote "cap bad yo", pretty much sums it up. The learning curve tends to favor the debater, and judges who haven't read any of the lit can flow it without issue.

 

3. It sounds good

This is fundamentally an extension of the simple subpoint, but due to the fact that it is simple to understand and, in most cases, probably true, you can explain the k and sound good while doing so. And, most of the link explanation you make in one debate can carry over into later debates, your constantly refining and perfecting your overviews and link narratives that flow really nicely. I like to make little jokes using quotes from (vietnam) war movies that sort of satirize the aff's arguments.

 

4. It (probably) solves case

Since a lot of your link analysis is going to be about how capitalism caused a lot of the aff harms, you can make the claim that the alt functionally solves case. You can also read the cook 06 card and make arguments about how self-preservation logic is the root cause of the aff harms.

 

5. The alt is simple

Since most alts are reject the aff, you can easily dissect any permutations. This is good because the perm is the argument that most judges use as an excuse to vote down the k.

 

6. Sustainability

If you make arguments as to why capitalism will inevitably collapse, this moots all the aff impact turns.

 

I'm sure there are other reasons why people like the cap k, but these are some of my favorites.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I read cap against neolib affs saying they are doing it wrong, and it's a true argument. If the state caused your harms, why use the state to solve them? lolz. Tumino in 1.

 

how'd that work at state alex?

 

just kidding. the methodology args are the best way to run the alt

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
there is one particullar thing I like about running cap. It is the reason to vote for the alternative. the card is International Perspective 2007. It says that all of the aff's impacts are inevitable under a system of cap, because conflict between orbiting states and the hegemon will always happen. It works as a good case turn.

 

I want this card... I am new to debate, and I have already been called a K hack, so of course I need the most basic K.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I want this card... I am new to debate, and I have already been called a K hack, so of course I need the most basic K.

 

there are a bunch of different IP cards. most are typically impacts, but we read one that talks about closing up space for other movements to take hold, which we spin as like critical aff solvency.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

6. Sustainability

If you make arguments as to why capitalism will inevitably collapse, this moots all the aff impact turns.

 

If capitalism will inevitably collapse how does the 1AC uniquely cause that to change?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
If capitalism will inevitably collapse how does the 1AC uniquely cause that to change?

 

This should be your link argument. That they stop the collapse. That is also how you can get "uniqueness" for the more old school judges.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
This should be your link argument. That they stop the collapse. That is also how you can get "uniqueness" for the more old school judges.

 

Well if the 1AC stops the collapse that makes the impact turn debate viable. I just don't see why cap teams think that because capitalism is collapsing now/ unsustainable that gets them out of the impact turn debate because either A.) The 1AC stops the inevitable collapse, thus making capitalism sustainable or B.) capitalism collapse is inevitable and the 1AC won't change that.

 

What I also don't understand is why any 1 policy will sustain an entire ideology that, as most of the neg literature says, is embedded in humans instinct.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
If capitalism will inevitably collapse how does the 1AC uniquely cause that to change?

 

1. framework. method 1st etc

 

2. google "socialism or barbarism". alternatively, the zizek essay "first as tragedy, then as farce" makes a "socialism or communism" arg.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Well if the 1AC stops the collapse that makes the impact turn debate viable. I just don't see why cap teams think that because capitalism is collapsing now/ unsustainable that gets them out of the impact turn debate because either A.) The 1AC stops the inevitable collapse, thus making capitalism sustainable or B.) capitalism collapse is inevitable and the 1AC won't change that.

 

What I also don't understand is why any 1 policy will sustain an entire ideology that, as most of the neg literature says, is embedded in humans instinct.

 

If you run cap as a reps K you don't run into this nonsense...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...